iam waiting 40 minutes for a game. Then i dont sit on my pc, but i have the spekers put on so i know when game starts. Then game starts and i was a spec!  I will deactivate this shit option! When iam in Lobby-->Game, then i WILL Play, i dont need this shit options. Now i must wait again for a game... How can i do to deactivate this autp-spec-shit?
+2 / -0
|
Your options here are: 1.) Circumvent it, then get kicked by players/reported for griefing. Ultimately this will lead to a path of a ban. (See precedent of DK) 2.) Don't circumvent it and learn to alt tab out of the game when you're going afk. (When the window is not active, it creates a windows alert noise thing) 3.) !propose battle It is in our best interest as a community to keep it around because playing with a team where 3 - 5 people are afk is just unbearable and having to exit to remove them from active play is just stupid. IM sure people don't want to play with that scenario in mind and having you afk despite not being flagged as afk in the lobby because you decided to circumvent stuff which I'd add probably violates quote:
Play in a way that is respectful to your team. |
TL;DR: Don't do this.
+2 / -3
|
There should be a notification sound when the start vote begins. Do you hear that? People are only specced if they're afk by the end of the start vote. If the start vote is too quick I can add a short countdown after a successful start vote for afkers.
+2 / -0
|
... and there is also !notify, that gives sound and notification when current game ends
+1 / -0
|
    DeinFreund and   niktu: First: i use ever the !notify function. Usually when a game takes a long time and I'm waiting in the lobby, I'm not sitting in front of the PC. Either I do something in the household or something else. If I am listed as an active player, then I hear the "notify" when the game ends or at the latest when a new game starts at the start Vote. But at the latest when I'm in the game and the "Select Commander" sound sounds, I'm always there. I don't want to go out of the window that much now that I'm almost never a spec, but I mean, I haven't heard a single sound. Neither the notify sound nor the start vote sound. Could it be that if you are a spectator that you will not get a sound at the start vote? Solution approaches: I don't know exactly how to solve that either. Either a button "I'll definitely play, no auto-AFK". But I could imagine that this would then be "abused" and that many players would be in the game even though they are AFK. The second possibility would be a button: "Own! Notify sound". It will always be played when the game ends and! Notify is active. You can then choose a loud mp3 song or sound so that you are always aware when a game is over. ??
+0 / -0
|
quote:
Could it be that if you are a spectator that you will not get a sound at the start vote?
|
Yes, polls only ring the players that can vote. Spectators can't vote.
+0 / -0
|
Yeah, this "I'll definitely play" button sounds like a great idea until griefers start attacking or you don't actually play. Then what? What do you do about the now 3-4 afkers who get to play a game that they're not playing and a waitlist of 8 people who could play but can't because 3-4 afkers said they'd "definitely play a game" that they're not playing now. How is this fair? This sounds like a disaster in waiting, and if you people want to play with afks, we might as well remove autospec before a battle starts. There was a reason it was added in the first place. For those who can't recall why it was added, here is some history. The irony here is this user has made a similar post in the past. And when it was in fact removed, there was complaints not even a year later. As someone who has had to deal with afk units in the past, I can attest to you that this would not be enjoyable to most of the top 50 who have to deal with afk units.
+0 / -1
|
  ShamanI will ignore your posts in the future. Just like you ignore what I said. I have already mentioned this problem above. quote:
But I could imagine that this would then be "abused" and that many players would be in the game even though they are AFK.
|
But that looks like you, just read 2 sentences from a whole paragraph and then puke yourself without meaning and understood.
+1 / -0
|
I don't really care about whether that thing Xivender is suggesting gets implemented, but I think that Shaman's reaaction is very aggresive for no reason at all. He just writes here that he is angry that it he was kicked due to inactivity a few times, and in his first reaction, Shaman threatens him with a ban? quote:
Circumvent it, then get kicked by players/reported for griefing. Ultimately this will lead to a path of a ban. (See precedent of DK) |
This is a good answer, but that stuff before this (or after this) was unnecessary. quote:
It is in our best interest as a community to keep it around because playing with a team where 3 - 5 people are afk is just unbearable and having to exit to remove them from active play is just stupid. |
+1 / -1
|
There is no threat of a ban in my post. quote:
1.) Circumvent it, then get kicked by players/reported for griefing. Ultimately this will lead to a path of a ban. (See precedent of DK) |
This here is a statement conveying facts. There is a precedent that    DaKeys established where continuous afking would result in a ban eventually after enough people complain about it and I foresee circumventing lobby stuff where you do not get spectated when afk to lead to that conclusion. I don't want people to be angry over this so I write a warning that doing that would start one down the path of a ban. I've been on the other side before, it's annoying to have to grind everything to a hault to spectate some afkers. This is rather recent and I'm sure that the damage caused by DaKeys is still fresh in people's minds. People probably still have a low tolerance for constant afking.
+0 / -0
|
   Xivender do not spam anybody's historical posts with downvotes because you disliked one thing they said. You have a history of doing this. Next time it happens you will be forum banned. If you whinge about this instruction from a moderator or about the deletion of your forum vote history, in this or any other thread, that will also result in a forum ban.
+1 / -0
|
Aquarim are you serious when writing that you would forum ban Xivender for disliking posts? Really? I mean, it's probably childlish to dislike historical posts of a person that upset you, but saying that you are gonna ban him from the forum for it is the most childlish thing that I have ever seen. And it's pretty authoritarian. It may be childlish, but Xivender has every right to do it. I mean, if I, upon reading what you wrote here, decided to click on your profile, scrolled through your post history, disagreed with something you wrote because I found it dumb or arrogant, would you ban me too? I wonder what would media say about Facebook, Reddit, or some big site like these if people were gettign banned simply for liking/upvoting posts. If you wrote something nasty and toxic, you were warned, and then you wrote it again, then yeah, ban is in order, but BANNING somebody for DOWNVOTING a post? Jesus Christ! Are you gonna ban me for expresing my opinion about your banning practices here as well? Just grow up man. PS: Now I understand why Firepluk found this community here toxic. It's like 15 messages in this thread and one guy is already being threatened with a ban for two different things.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
disagreed with something you wrote because I found it dumb or arrogant |
You are missing context    Silent_AI. In response to this thread, Xivender went back through the last several months of Shaman's posts and systematically downvoted them all, even posts which cannot possibly have been objected to by Xivender on their own merits. Xivender has been warned not to do this in the past. quote:
I wonder what would media say about Facebook, Reddit, or some big site like these |
The purpose of those sites is to facilitate conversation (or, more likely, to make money). The purpose of this site is to maintain the Zero-K community as a welcoming place for people to hang out and play the game. Allowing people to pursue vendettas through such means as downvote spamming of unrelated posts would run counter to that purpose.
+0 / -0
|
Okay, that is a bit extreme, but it changes nothing. Solution would be for Shaman to ask Xivender to not to do it, and solve it with him personally, but he should not use his competences as an administrator of this group. Because what Xivender does does not breach any forum rules, thus it should be punished with a ban. And honestly, these downvotes are gonna hurt rather Xivender than Shaman, because when people see that in a span of few months Shaman was consistently being downvoted by Xivender, there is gotta be something wrong with Xivender, not Shaman.
+1 / -0
|
quote:
but he should not use his competences as an administrator of this group |
Shaman is not an administrator, and whatever clout he has or people think he might have as a contributor to development had nothing to do with the moderator decision made in this case. Downvote spamming has been consistently disallowed and reverted by moderators in the past. Perhaps it happens often enough that it should just be explicitly written down in the Code of Conduct. quote:
Because what Xivender does does not breach any forum rules, thus it should be punished with a ban. |
Xivender has been, in the past, specifically instructed by moderators not to do this thing - so it is, in fact, a breach of the rules, specifically section 5 of the Code of Conduct. I would also say that it violates the spirit of section 1.
+0 / -0
|
Downvotes serve little purpose other than encouraging negative behavior (if you have a substantial disagreement, you can write a reply, if it's a matter of public opinion, a poll serves this purpose, and if a post is completely off the rails, that's time for moderation action). At least this is better than Reddit where downvotes affect the order and visibility of messages and promote groupthink, but I see not much merit in having negative karma here.
+1 / -0
|
I am not sure there is quite zero value in downvotes. They are a cleaner way of dealing with shitposts that are not clearly modactionable (or are directed at the devs/moderators, making modaction more awkward) than everybody weighing in with actual reasoned arguments against a shitpost. Whether that is worth the downsides of having downvotes I do not know.
+1 / -0
|
it is correct that I have downvoted some of the shaman's postings. however, I have read through every posting beforehand and formed my opinion on it. I would also have liked to ask what I have against the corresponding statement if an account is required. instead, all dislike I have ever made have now been erased by shamans. But his dislikes still persisted with me. If you had done it right, you could have asked me in which context I see it. or you would only have to delete the downloads or dislikes of the last few days. but what can I say about it. I started a poast here in which I only wanted to address this problem with the AFK and was aggressively turned on by the shamans. Then I explained my point of view again and instead of going into it, the shaman just took something wildly out of context and misrepresented it. I see this discussion here is pretty pointless. For now, I will completely withdraw from the forum.
+0 / -0
|
Instead of leaving the forum because we disagree on some topic why don't you stay and make amends. There is really no reason why we have to continue down this path. You have a problem and I have the capability to solve it. I would prefer a solution that does not involve outright removing the afk detection as I see it is dangerous to yourself and potentially unfun for others. I have some ideas for solutions and im willing to give you the necessary changes for them should you choose the path of reconciliation. I will give you a token of good will by removing my downvote history since it seems to be a point of contention.
+0 / -0
|
It doesn't take a high rate of failing to un-AFK when the game starts for games to be frequently impacted by AFK people, so the option would have to be pretty obscure or come with effective enforcement of abuses. Perhaps if there was an option to disable the auto spectate on yourself, but with the understanding that there is an automated penalty if the game starts with you failing to place your commander.
+0 / -0
|
